Research Journal by Geza Csosz

This practice-based study explores the idea that the present does not exist as a tangible moment in time. Instead, it functions as an elusive theoretical boundary between the past and the future, both perceptually and ontologically. Drawing on philosophical, mathematical and phenomenological theories of temporality, the study asks: Can the present be understood as an abstract limit (infinitely brief and therefore non-existent from the standpoint of human perception) rather than an experiential moment, and how can this notion be explored, visualised and critiqued through photography and video art?

With their intrinsic relationships to duration and temporality, photography and video offer unique methods with which to interrogate the instability of the present. Through experimental moving-image work and still imagery, this research project develops visual strategies that depict the present as a conceptual void, emphasising absence over presence. The paradoxical nature of 'now' is revealed by techniques such as freezing, stretching time and manipulating repetition, duration and motion, making perceptible that which is usually imperceptible.

The project combines theoretical inquiry with artistic practice, seeking to bridge philosophy and visual art. The aim is to generate new aesthetic experiences and critical reflections on temporal perception. Translating complex temporal theories into visual form challenges conventional understandings of time, inviting audiences to confront the elusiveness of the present moment.

Etymology & conceptual framework of “now” and “present”

“now” – etymology and usage

The English adverb “now” (meaning “at this moment”, “just now”) derives from Old English nū. The etymological chain can be traced further to Proto-Germanic *nu and ultimately to the Proto-Indo-European root *nu- meaning “now, then”.

In earlier usage, “now” emphasized immediacy and temporal nearness, linking the moment of utterance (or perception) with the present time of reference. Over time (no pun intended), its usage expanded to include a noun sense (“the now”, “this now moment”), especially from the late Middle English period (14th century) onwards.

Thus, linguistically “now” signals the fleeting “just‐now” instant, the transition from future to past via the current moment.

“present” – Etymology and Usage

The English word “present” (as adjective: “being here/now”, as noun: “the present time”, as verb: “to present/bring forth”) comes via Middle English and Old French present, from Latin praesens, praesent- (“being before/at hand, present”). The Latin stems from prae- (“before”) + esse (“to be”).

Hence, etymologically, “present” carries the meaning of “being before” or “being at hand” in a temporal or spatial sense. Within English usage from circa 1300 onward, “present” as an adjective meant “currently existing, in existence now”, and as a noun “the present time/moment”.

Conceptual / Philosophical Significance

“now” as temporal instant

In philosophical terms, “now” corresponds to the notion of the temporal instant — the point at which the future becomes the past via the present. The question arises: is there an objective “now” that all observers share, or is “now” subjective, relative, perspectival? Modern physics (especially relativity) suggests that simultaneity is relative, thereby challenging the notion of a single global “now”.

If “now” is perspectival, then its ontological status in relation to the present becomes philosophically problematic.

“present” as ontological category

“Present” designates the time which is “currently real” (in presentist theories) or the status of being in the present moment. In presentism, one holds that only the present exists (the past and future do not in the same way). In contrast, eternalism holds that past, present, and future are equally real (or that “time” is a dimension somewhat like space).

Thus, the present as a category raises deep issues: What does it mean to exist in the present? Is “the present” just the moving boundary between past and future? Is it ontologically privileged or illusory?

Relevance to visual arts, photography and video

In photographic and video‐art practices, the “now” and “present” become fraught with tension. A photograph captures a moment, a “now”, but when viewed it is already in the past; the “present” of the photograph is thus compromised. Some theorists (for example, in the philosophy of photography) argue that photography by its nature reveals the instability of the present: the captured image is always “this was”.

A very brief historical and conceptual background of the 'Non-Existence of the Present' 

1. Early philosophical roots: antiquity and medieval thought

The tension between present, past, and future can be traced to Ancient philosophy.

• Heraclitus (c. 535–475 BCE) emphasized flux: “everything flows” (panta rhei). For Heraclitus, the present is never static; each moment is immediately past as it is perceived. This prefigures the idea that the present, as a stable temporal object, does not exist.

• Plato (c. 427–347 BCE) distinguished between the world of eternal Forms and the temporal sensory world. Time, for Plato, is a moving image of eternity, implying that the present cannot be fully grasped in the eternal sense.

• Aristotle (384–322 BCE) conceptualized time as a measure of change relative to ‘before’ and ‘after’. He did not treat the present as a static entity but as the boundary between past and future—a fleeting point, inherently unstable.

In the medieval period, philosophical debate on the reality of temporal instants was framed within theological contexts.

• Augustine of Hippo (354–430) in Confessions explored the paradoxical nature of time: the present of past and future only exists in memory or expectation. Augustine concluded that “the present of things past is in memory; the present of things future is in expectation; the present of things present is in attention,” implicitly questioning the ontological status of the present.

2. Early modern philosophy: the present as ephemeral

The 17th–18th centuries saw the first rigorous metaphysical discussions of the present.

• Isaac Newton (1642–1727) posited absolute time as flowing uniformly, suggesting an objective present. However, in practical terms, human perception cannot access this continuous flow—only temporal slices, or “nows,” are experienced.

• Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) countered with a relational theory of time: time has no existence independent of events. If time is relational, the present exists only insofar as events are ordered in relation to one another, not as a standalone entity.

• Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that time is a form of intuition: we structure experiences temporally. Thus, the present is not an ontologically existing slice of reality, but a necessary framework for cognition.

3. 19th–early 20th century: presentism, eternalism, and the instability of now

The 19th and early 20th centuries brought more formal philosophical analysis:

• McTaggart (1908), in The Unreality of Time, argued that the A-series (past‑present‑future) leads to contradiction. If the present constantly moves, it cannot be fixed; hence, in strict terms, the present is unreal.

• Henri Bergson (1859–1941) distinguished between mathematical time (measurable) and lived duration (la durée). For Bergson, the present is indivisible and continuously flows, resisting capture; this aligns with the intuition that the present “does not exist” as a static temporal object.

• Phenomenology: Husserl (1859–1938) developed the notion of retention and protention: consciousness always retains the immediate past and anticipates the immediate future; the present is never isolated, further emphasizing its ephemeral nature.

4. 20th-century science: relativity, quantum mechanics, and the present

Physics radically changed the conception of the present:

• Einstein’s Special Relativity (1905) demonstrated that simultaneity is relative: there is no universal “now” shared across frames of reference. The present becomes observer‑dependent; it is not absolute.

• Quantum mechanics introduces indeterminacy: the precise moment of measurement collapses superpositions, but the “present” of an event depends on both observation and context.

• These findings support the philosophical intuition that the present may not exist as a universal, stable temporal slice.

5. 20th–21st century art: capturing the elusive now

Visual arts explored the instability of the present through various media:

• Photography: Roland Barthes (Camera Lucida, 1981) argued that photographs inherently testify to a “that‑has‑been” — the moment is captured but immediately past, never present in itself.

• Video and Film: Deleuze (Cinema 2: The Time‑Image, 1985) and Kracauer (Theory of Film, 1960) considered how cinematic temporality could depict time itself rather than merely a narrative. The “time‑image” destabilizes the present by exposing durations and flows.

• Conceptual and Performance Art: Artists like Hiroshi Sugimoto and later time-based practitioners create works emphasizing continuous temporal processes, where the present is always slipping, never fixed.

• Photography Projects: Fixed-point daily photography (as in your “Danger Soft Mud” project) and slow-motion video exemplify the act of recording a “present” that is already past, visually interrogating the non-existence of the present.

6. Contemporary philosophical and artistic implications

• Philosophically, debates continue between presentism (only the present exists) and eternalism (all points in time exist equally). The non-existence of the present is aligned with McTaggart’s paradox and phenomenological insights into consciousness.

• Artistically, time-based media allow practitioners to visualize the non-existence of the present: the medium itself becomes the evidence that each “now” is already past.